HATING ALL THINGS NASCAR

 

In what appeared to be nothing more than a thinly veiled Oct. 2 attack via Twitter, "almsnotes" gave the world: "Interesting - ALMS marques BMW, Audi and Porsche saw increases in U.S. sales for Sept. NASCAR marques Ford and Toyota were down" (SIC).

Just a passing comment from someone on that side of the fence who was wondering about things cosmic; to be sure.

Then again, the above emanated from the same organization whose CEO, Scott Atherton, in July 2007, derided NASCAR for the latter's adoption of "cleaner" racing fuels, ripping NASCAR CEO Brian France by name while also extolling ALMS' "green" efforts in an "it's-all-about-us" moment not unlike those utilized by former Soviet Union leaders who never seemed to miss a moment to tell the world of the Soviet Union's greatness in all things. That would be the same "workers paradise" which collapsed from within during the latter part of the 20th century.

Yet, one would think praise would've been in order, perhaps even if only backhandedly so, should saving the Earth truly be ALMS' intended "green" goal as opposed to, say, crass commercialism.

Atherton's NASCAR reaction, though, didn't seem much different from that of a schizophrenic teacher, who having previously chastised a student for poor grades, then slaps that student for subsequently producing an improved report card.

Meanwhile, legions of ALMS fans - or maybe it's just one ALMS fan speaking legions - have time and again pointed the fickle finger of accusation at Grand-Am administrators, incorrectly claiming the latter have over the years have either repeatedly predicted or sought the ALMS' demise, publicly.

The ALMS’ faithful wailing and gnashing of teeth rose to a recent peak when one NASCAR type, Jim Hunter - long irritated over the public potshots his "family" has taken - took umbrage with recent ALMS rules changes that suddenly facilitate acceptance of Rolex Series race cars formerly thought, if not outwardly portrayed as beneath worthy of being in an ALMS competition.

OFFICIALLY UNOFFICIAL
The highest-finishing petite Petite Le Mans LMP2 car, the No. 20 Lola B09 86 Mazda of Butch Leitzinger, Marino Franchitti and Ben Devlin, was as many as two laps behind the five GT2 cars finishing ahead of it and nine laps in arrears to the No. 20 Lola B09 86 Mazda of Chris Dyson and Guy Smith.

Now, how could the No. 20 Dyson Lola B09 86 Mazda win with the No. 20 Dyson Lola B09 86 Mazda having posted nine additional laps?

Answer: 2005 Maserati MC 12.

Well, kinda sorta.

A production car not available at your average U.S. car-dealership showroom, the 2005 MC-12 wasn't approved for competition under the Federation Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA) rules ("homologated" in rules parlance), thus also lacked approval for competition by the Automobile Club de l'Ouest (ACO) - you know, the Yurrupean rules body with which the ALMS so enjoys identifying itself, as in "LeMans" this and "LeMans" that.

Using an "unapproved" approved race car in the course of winning its LMPBBTF class (you figure it out) at the recent Petit Le Mans, the unofficially named No. 16 "Pond Scum" Lola Mazda was unofficially termed an "experimental exercise" because it utilized biobutanol for fuel instead of one of the series' approved fuels.

For now attempting to get beyond the abstraction of allowing a car to race with a fuel that wasn't approved, butanol is a four-carbon alcohol - butyl alcohol - that much like ethanol can be produced via fermentation and is derived from two principal sources: biodegradable, such as recently publicized "swamp scum," and thus is distinguished as biobutanol; or, "dead dinosaurs" and thus is named "petrobutanol" even though each method's end product actually has the same chemical signature.

Though butanol has been around for the better part of 100 years, it's largely been treated as a bi-product of a previously more desirable product and thus has yet to be studied at length - especially insofar as environmental impact is concerned - though DuPont and British Petroleum are hard at work on boosting the product's use.

Remember one thing: if "it" burns, "it" also has a carbon signature, whether ethanol, butanol or "fossil."

Still butanol's an interesting fuel and more information can be found starting with this U.S. Department of Energy Website.

Indeed, so much of an experimental exercise was the No. 16 that it "officially" was sent to the rear of the ALMS Petit LeMans grid even though the fuel was known to be unofficial. Still the No. 16 Lola Mazda posted an official unofficial seventh-place finish. (Look, this writer didn't make up the ALMS/SCO/Petit Le Mans rules, dude).

The No. 16 car really wasn't at Petit LeMans, just like the Maserati in 2005 or the Porsche Spyders for at least part of the 2008 season and, quite possibly, still other non-existent race cars at still other times. And, no, we'll not get into the GT2 Team Corvette cars, which this year are running and winning with at least one ACO rule book exception (engine) that it supposedly won't get to keep in 2010 - assuming ALMS' adherence to the ACO's rule book, right Porsche? Nah, the ALMS wouldn't do anything contrary to the ACO. Would it?

Then, to further muck the water that flowed down Road Atlanta's hillsides, post-Petit LeMans "Tweet" by at least one recognized, reputable motorsports writer claimed one Dyson Lola Mazda used a "2008 wing" during the race. Problem: which Dyson Lola Mazda used it, the "experimental exercise" or the other car?

Now please, before anyone starts hacking-up hairballs, ALMS' past rules-bending - at least insofar as that darn ACO rule book is concerned - is such that its grids haven't always, well, been wholly defined by procedures found in the ACO rules book. So don’t be blaming a Dyson team that was allowed to do as it did.

 

For 2010, Atherton and company are at least admitting as much.

Huh?

"I’ve said before that it’s difficult to run a 10-race series across very diverse venues with a set of rules that have been optimized for a single event around a very unique circuit that occurs one weekend per year," Atherton said of the rationale ALMS used in deciding to altogether occasionally, partly and/or wholly ditch the ACO's 2010 rule book for seven of the ALMS' nine races set for next season.

Give or take, of course; races and/or rules.

"It hasn’t been an excuse but an acknowledgment of how the way things have been,” Atherton added, evidently having recently channeled a more succinct Roger Edmondson point made on the same subject shortly after Grand-Am's founding in 2000.

 

IT'S TIME FOR HE SAID; HE SAID!

That's right, sportscar fans, it's time for another edition of "What He Really Said!" or, "Balderdash Translated!"

ATHERTON: "We are the first movers to embrace a value-based new set of classes while at the same time retaining the core elements of what has made the American Le Mans Series the benchmark professional sportscar racing series in modern times."

WHAT HE REALLY SAID: "We have decided that the ACO's rules won't work here most of the time but - in yet another great example of obfuscation - the fans (the ones whom we formerly claimed to be 'for') may or may not see something that really is or isn't there or here or, perhaps, anywhere at all."

Get that?

Okay, let's try it another way:

The ALMS, sanctioned by IMSA and, perhaps, at various times possibly following rules established or not established by the Automobile Club de l'Ouest, will hold two LeMans-style rules races in 2010 for which the competing race cars may or may not be defined under ACO rules and to which the ALMS may or may not apply still another set of rules.

The rest of the schedule, seven races, will be conducted under a completely different set of rules other than wholly under those specified by the ACO, the latter either having no clue as to what the ALMS is doing (lost in translation) or are are satisfied with the franchise-fee check having cleared.

The ALMS at its races, not the ACO, will decide who can do what, when, where and how so as to get enough cars on the grid because that which the series previously believed would work has been demonstrably proven otherwise.

"The new format for 2010 will create more opportunities for more teams and manufacturers to participate in the American Le Mans Series, while at the same time providing fans with the chance to see new cars, teams and drivers in both prototype and GT competition," Atherton said.

Thus, as it now apparently stands, a race team seeking and winning a 2010 ALMS championship might not get an invite to a 24 Heures Du Mans because a race attendee may, or may not see, depending on the set of official rules undertaken, a team competing outside of the Le Mans rules at the same time while competing under the ALMS rules - not THE Le Mans rules; the AMERICAN Le Mans Series rules.

Look, using Pi ("as in pi are round; cornbread are square"), multiply the square root of the primary colors' main integer, cubed, to get the answer.

Huh?

Exactly!

ATHERTON: “As everyone knows, there’s a lot of different ways to go racing. We’re not suggesting there isn’t a way to spend more money racing with (the Le Mans Prototype Challenge) but it’s going to be a very tightly controlled example; sealed engines, single tire supplier, limited suspension adjustments, limited gear ratios. The point is that everyone’s going to have the same tool. And the point is affordability and value.”

WHAT HE REALLY SAID: "Spec series!"

“Au contraire! Zee ALMS eez not a spec series nor weeel it allow tube-frame cars! Nehvehr!”

Then, using Pi, multiply the square root of the primary colors' main integer, cubed, to get the answer.

Huh?

Exactly!

And for what price in 2010 can one run what one brung? According to those having had a look-see, a good five-figures' worth for two races: Sebring and Petit Le Mans. But ya gotta give 'em credit: the remaining seven races will cost only a few hundred dollars more.

Having already quoted Atherton, here's another; one of Ol' DC's favorites, in fact, straight out of The New York Times.

"Dude, you wouldn't believe where I am," Atherton was quoted by Times reporter Dave Caldwell in a Feb. 16, 2005, story.

At this point, one has to wonder if anyone else has a clue, either.

Care to disagree? Call (386) 523-1880 Tuesday from 7:05 p.m. to 8 p.m. EDT and we'll wedge you in somewhere on Grand-Am Weekly with guests Scott Pruett, Max Angelelli and Alex Gurney. Wyatt won’t hang up on you. Promise.

Later,

DC